Adds a research note on whether/how to scan for malicious code (not just
secrets) in commits pushed through the git-gate, and whether the semantic
(LLM) layer is a defensible paid feature.
Verdict: no scanner reliably detects malicious code (undecidable +
adversarial), so the frame is raise-cost + cover-the-obvious + human-gate
the dangerous. Ranked layers: dependency/supply-chain scanning (Socket/OSV/
GuardDog) > heuristic/obfuscation (Semgrep-on-diff) > risk-based human
gating via the existing supervise plane > best-effort LLM diff-review.
Fast scanners inline in the synchronous pre-receive; heavy analysis async.
Monetization: the paid unit is the governed git-egress review bundle
(managed semantic review + web-console human-review flow + RBAC + audit +
cross-run policy), not the raw scanner — which stays OSS like gitleaks.
Extends the egress audit+custody wedge to code artifacts; the supervise
console generalizes across all proposal types (egress, gitleaks, commit
review). Sell the workflow, not the detector's accuracy.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YBCHap11yGAKuKfsehNPaD
